RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Countries routinely offering acellular pertussis vaccine, where long-term protection is not sustained, have the challenge of selecting an optimal schedule to minimise disease among young infants. We conducted a narrative systematic review and synthesis of information to evaluate different pertussis immunisation strategies at controlling pertussis disease, hospitalisation, deaths, and vaccine effectiveness among young infants. METHODS: We conducted a review of the literature on studies about the primary, booster, and/or maternal vaccination series and synthesised findings narratively. Countries offering the first three doses of vaccine within six-months of life and a booster on or before the second year or life were defined as accelerated primary and booster schedules, respectively. Countries offering primary and booster doses later were defined as extended primary and booster schedules. All search results were screened, and articles reviewed and reconciled, by two authors. The Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies of Intervention tool was used to evaluate the risk of bias. FINDINGS: A total of 98 studies were included in the analyses and the following recurring themes were described: timing of vaccination, vaccine coverage, waning immunity/vaccine effectiveness, direct and indirect effectiveness, switching from an accelerated to extended schedule, impact of changes in testing. The risk of bias was generally low to moderate for most studies. CONCLUSION: Comparing schedules is challenging and there was insufficient evidence to that one schedule was superior to another. Countries must select a schedule that maintains high vaccine coverage and reduced the risk of delaying the delivery vaccines to protect infants.
Asunto(s)
Tos Ferina , Humanos , Lactante , Tos Ferina/prevención & control , Vacunación , Lagunas en las Evidencias , Familia , HospitalizaciónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Insect bite inflammation may mimic cellulitis and promote unnecessary antibiotic usage, contributing to antimicrobial resistance in primary care. We wondered how general practice clinicians assess and manage insect bites, diagnose cellulitis, and prescribe antibiotics. METHOD: This is a Quality Improvement study in which 10 general practices in England and Wales investigated patients attending for the first time with insect bites between April and September 2021 to their practices. Mode of consultation, presentation, management plan, and reattendance or referral were noted. Total practice flucloxacillin prescribing was compared to that for insect bites. RESULTS: A combined list size of 161,346 yielded 355 insect bite consultations. Nearly two-thirds were female, ages 3-89 years old, with July as the peak month and a mean weekly incidence of 8 per 100,000. GPs still undertook most consultations; most were phone consultations, with photo support for over half. Over 40% presented between days 1 and 3 and common symptoms were redness, itchness, pain, and heat. Vital sign recording was not common, and only 22% of patients were already taking an antihistamine despite 45% complaining of itch. Antibiotics were prescribed to nearly three-quarters of the patients, mainly orally and mostly as flucloxacillin. Reattendance occurred for 12% and referral to hospital for 2%. Flucloxacillin for insect bites contributed a mean of 5.1% of total practice flucloxacillin prescriptions, with a peak of 10.7% in July. CONCLUSIONS: Antibiotics are likely to be overused in our insect bite practice and patients could make more use of antihistamines for itch before consulting.
It can be difficult to know if redness, heat, swelling, and pain from insect bites are due to inflammation or infection. Prescribing unnecessary antibiotics may result in germs becoming resistant to antibiotics when needed. Ten general practices in England and Wales investigated their management of insect bites in the 6 months of April to September 2021 inclusive. There were 355 bites; women presented more often than men, and ages were from 3 to 89 years old, half of them were 3069 years old. People mainly consulted their GP by phone with photos of their bites. Key symptoms were redness, itchness, heat, and pain. More people had itch than were taking antihistamines or using steroid cream. Most people (nearly 7 out of 10) were prescribed an oral antibiotic, usually flucloxacillin, which accounted for about 5% of total flucloxacillin prescribed in the practices. Only 2 in 100 people needed further hospital care. It is likely that general practice clinicians are over-using antibiotics for insect bites and that home management before seeking medical help with painkillers, antihistamines, and steroid creams could be used more. Now that we have baseline data, there is a need to set up studies to prove that these reduce antibiotic usage.
Asunto(s)
Medicina General , Mordeduras y Picaduras de Insectos , Humanos , Femenino , Preescolar , Niño , Adolescente , Adulto Joven , Adulto , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Masculino , Floxacilina/uso terapéutico , Mordeduras y Picaduras de Insectos/tratamiento farmacológico , Celulitis (Flemón)/tratamiento farmacológico , Celulitis (Flemón)/epidemiología , Reino Unido , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Pautas de la Práctica en MedicinaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To analyse mortality statistics in the United Kingdom during the initial phases of the severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic and to understand the impact of the pandemic on national mortality. METHODS: Retrospective review of weekly national mortality statistics in the United Kingdom over the past 5 years, including subgroup analysis of respiratory mortality rates. RESULTS: During the early phases of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in the first months of 2020, there were consistently fewer deaths per week compared with the preceding 5 years. This pattern was not observed at any other time within the past 5 years. We have termed this phenomenon the "SARS-CoV-2 paradox." We postulate potential explanations for this seeming paradox and explore the implications of these data. CONCLUSIONS: Paradoxically, but potentially importantly, lower rather than higher weekly mortality rates were observed during the early stages of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. This paradox may have implications for current and future healthcare utilisation. A rebound increase in non-SARS-CoV-2 mortality later this year might coincide with the peak of SARS-CoV-2 admissions and mortality.